Josh Norris

All Star Circuit

Senior Bowl Review: Offense

1. Quinton Patton (6000/200), Louisiana Tech - Smooth, fluid, and reliable. My fifth ranked player entering the week, Patton is the top senior receiver (excluding Tavon Austin who fits in his own category). I will continue to compare him to Reggie Wayne, as Patton doesn’t win with flashy moves or explosiveness. Instead, his wise route running and body control in routes and at the catch point are the qualities that will translate best in the NFL. Add on the fact that Patton faced plenty of press coverage, winning his individual battle on each occasion, and he is primed to produce early in his career.

2. Markus Wheaton (5110/183), Oregon State - Wheaton will automatically help as a vertical threat in the NFL. Drawing comparisons to Mike Wallace, I actually believe Wheaton has a larger array of route running capabilities at this point in his career than Wallace did. His awareness along the sideline is an added bonus. These two have separated themselves from the pack of attending senior receivers.

3. Terrance Williams (6017/201), Baylor - Williams reverted back to his 2011 form: A limited route tree and inconsistent hands. In 2012 he was much stronger at the catch point and was more reliable in that area. I had concerns that Williams could be stuck as a vertical target prior to the year, but he proved me differently in live action. During this week, however, those same thoughts started popping back into my head, especially seeing him fail to separate against safeties in man coverage.

4. Aaron Dobson (6025/203), Marshall - Dobson will have a great highlight reel, but there are plenty of questions. The opposing corners beat Dobson to the catch point with physical play multiple times this week, but in running routes against air the Marshall receiver showed burst out of his breaks with concise footwork.

5. Marquise Goodwin (5087/179), Texas - After watching him this week, the Longhorns really misused Goodwin. He was asked to run a lot of vertical routes, short screens, and jet sweeps or reverses in college. Despite that Goodwin was able to separate consistently against close coverage in a very natural way. He will struggle to get off the jam against press coverage, but Goodwin is very intriguing. Even if I have to use this week as the backbone of my evaluation (which I hate).

6. Cobi Hamilton (6016/191), Arkansas - Hamilton’s game is built on strong running after the catch. he isn’t afraid to take a big hit on contact, either, but he doesn’t quite run like an explosive receiver in his routes.

Tight Ends/Fullbacks

1. Vance McDonald (6041/262), Rice - At Rice, McDonald was used in a variety of ways that either muddled his evaluation or showed off versatility. Yes, he had a number of drops this week, but McDonald is a very intriguing player and it has become obvious why he’s a favorite of Phil Savage.

2. Michael Williams (6056/264), Alabama - Williams is the opposite of flashy, but he will play in the NFL for a long time because of his outstanding blocking for the position and large frame to shield defenders at the catch point. He will not get open unless he finds an open area or gets physical with a defensive back, but Williams is improving in that area.

3. Nick Kasa (6054/271), Colorado - Another great blocker for the position, Kasa seemed to fight the ball when trying to adjust for catches, but that is to be expected for the former defensive lineman. With overlooked long speed, Kasa is a likely fourth- or fifth-round pick.

4. Mychal Rivera (6032/237), Tennessee - Rivera built on his game each year at Tennessee, getting more and more comfortable working in the short to intermediate levels of defense and when hauling in catches.

5. Ryan Otten (6052/235), San Jose State - Otten checked in seven pounds lighter than expected due to the flu, but his game is very similar to Gary Barnidge’s. It is tough to know if that is a compliment, because Barnidge is tough to figure out, but Otten runs upright with reliable hands.

6. Kyle Juszczyk (6013/248), Harvard - I really liked what I saw from Juszczyk, who was making a conversion from a receiving role in the Ivy League to lead blocker. We know he can catch with comfort in the open field, but Juszczyk showed enough attitude and technique as a lead blocker to earn a draftable grade. He has deceptive long speed as well.

Offensive Linemen

1. Eric Fisher (6072/305), Central Michigan - There’s not much left to say about Fisher, but I believe he should be mentioned in the Luke Joeckel conversation as this class’ top offensive tackle. Fisher has quick hands and a strong extension to latch and ride or control his opposition immediately after the snap. His balance and base are also outstanding.

2. Lane Johnson (6062/302), Oklahoma - He looks like a tight end (and probably moves like one) but Johnson is a bonafide left tackle with a chance to play on the right side if necessary. He could add more weight, which would help with getting jolted on first contact leading to moments of waist bending, but Johnson’s athletic footwork to recover and mirror is awesome. He’s likely a top-20 pick.

3. Larry Warford (6032/333), Kentucky - There’s a lot of talk surrounding Chance Warmack, and rightfully so since he is likely the highest graded player in this draft. After that, UNC’s Jonathan Cooper gets a ton of love because of his agility when pulling and hitting targets at the second level. However, give me Warford because of his dominant, mauling style to consistently move or stone his opposition. And for his stout size, Warford is deceptively athletic.

4. Kyle Long (6061/304), Oregon - Long is inexperienced but along with his bloodlines comes a hard nosed attitude to push his opponents. The Duck is also athletic, so the only question is if his future is at guard or tackle.

5. Justin Pugh (6047/301), Syracuse - Pugh’s short arms may concern some, but if he gains a grip on his opponent on contact, the Syracuse product matches up very well with all types of rushers. He was occasionally driven into the backfield with force when facing length, but Pugh works best in close quarters and could move to guard.

6. Brian Winters (6034/310) - I love Winters’ nasty, rugged style. He blocks to punish, and although that gets Winters into trouble at times since he overextends, it will benefit him in the long run. He played tackle in college, but I expect Winters to play guard int he NFL.

The purpose of Senior Bowl week is to supplement completed area-scout evaluations in practice and interviews. No evaluations are based on a single week’s performance, but certain prospects did help (or potentially hurt) their status and will force evaluators to take a second look at their live game action. I will breakdown each position below and rank participating performers accordingly. Please note, this is not strictly based on how these prospects did this week, instead it is based on their complete evaluation up to this point.

For comparison, here is how I ranked the attendees prior to this week.

Heights are listed with the first digit being feet, the next two digit as inches, and the final digit is eighths of an inch. Example: 6021 equals 6 feet, 2 inches, and 1/8ths of an inch.

Quarterbacks

1. Tyler Wilson (6021/218), Arkansas - I should say this now: Nothing has changed with my quarterback rankings (other than Manuel jumping Landry) and I question anyone who writes that one separated themselves from the pack. Wilson sticks to the pocket in the face of pressure and isn’t afraid to test the field vertically. His velocity and placement will need to improve in that section of the field, however, but more decisive footwork will certainly help.

2. Zac Dysert (6027/224), Miami (OH) - The RedHawk sailed multiple passes in 1 on 1s and 7 on 7s, but performed much better in full team activities. My biggest question with Dysert is if he can overcome the miscues that appeared in 2012, after the Miami (OH) offense asked him to make quick decisions on throws less than 10 yards almost strictly from the gun. Go back to 2011 and Dysert displays confident footwork and movement in the pocket while finding downfield targets on the move.

3. Mike Glennon (6066/220), NC State - The longer Glennon holds the ball, the more worried I get. Just like in college, Glennon made some excellent throws all over the field when throwing after bouncing off of his back foot. He could thrive in quick progression, faster tempo offenses, but pressure up the middle, confusion, and receivers failing to separate will give him plenty of trouble.

4. Ryan Nassib (6024/214), Syracuse - Nassib is a conundrum. He has a cannon with limited touch on short to intermediate routes, but his downfield throws look like rainbows. He is mobile, which leads to a lot of movement in the pocket while working through progressions. Some might like that, but I see it as a lack of comfort and possible a frenetic style.

5. E.J. Manuel (6043/237), FSU - It is tough to get a good feel on Manuel. Jimbo Fisher did not do him any favors at FSU, and Manuel flashes some nice throws, but too often the Seminole is a step late on his progression or decision and has placement issues.

6. Landry Jones (6032/221), Oklahoma - I don’t trust Landry as anything more than a fifth-round pick. In a clean pocket early in games he has made some impressive throws, but it tails off after that.

Running Backs

1. Johnathan Franklin (5100/201), UCLA - Off of his 2011 games, I considered Franklin an adequate but draftable prospect. Fast forward to this year and the Bruin showed much better vision when finding cutback lanes or working off blocks and his ability to make people miss at the second level was greatly enhanced. Don’t be surprised if we see him selected at the end of the second day.

2. Stepfan Taylor (5090/216), Stanford - Taylor is shorter than I expected, but the Stanford product seems to find open areas and pick up tough yardage despite a lack of top-end speed. He may run a high 4.5 or 4.6 forty, but Taylor is a confident runner with tools to produce in a dual back role.

3. Mike Gillislee (5112/207), Florida - A true front or strong side runner, Gillislee thrives on working behind pulling linemen between the tackles. Coaches will love the senior because he runs to his assigned lane, follows blocks, and can even create on strong cuts. Add in some good pass protection during the 2012 season, and Gillislee is likely a third- or fourth-round pick.

4. Kenjon Barner (5092/188), Oregon - It may not be popular, but I prefer Barner to LaMichael James. Both have magnets that draw them to the sideline, and James may be a tick faster, but barner is more willing to run between the tackles and instead of pinballing off contact, he can actually absorb hits on occasion to pick up extra yards.

5. Robbie Rouse (5057/186), Fresno State - Rouse is already drawing comparisons to Darren Sproles because of his size. I really like Rouse, but that comparison is unwarranted. First, the Fresno State grad doesn’t have the same short choppy steps as Sproles and instead of explosive cuts I would call Rouse’s open field moves “exaggerated”. Thats not an insult, since his game reminds me more of a smaller Brian Westbrook.

6. Mike James (5105/212), Miami - I would have preferred to see a Shrine call up since James is a late rounder to me. Alen Dumonjic had a nice writeup on James back in November.

1. Quinton Patton (6000/200), Louisiana Tech - Smooth, fluid, and reliable. My fifth ranked player entering the week, Patton is the top senior receiver (excluding Tavon Austin who fits in his own category). I will continue to compare him to Reggie Wayne, as Patton doesn’t win with flashy moves or explosiveness. Instead, his wise route running and body control in routes and at the catch point are the qualities that will translate best in the NFL. Add on the fact that Patton faced plenty of press coverage, winning his individual battle on each occasion, and he is primed to produce early in his career.

2. Markus Wheaton (5110/183), Oregon State - Wheaton will automatically help as a vertical threat in the NFL. Drawing comparisons to Mike Wallace, I actually believe Wheaton has a larger array of route running capabilities at this point in his career than Wallace did. His awareness along the sideline is an added bonus. These two have separated themselves from the pack of attending senior receivers.

3. Terrance Williams (6017/201), Baylor - Williams reverted back to his 2011 form: A limited route tree and inconsistent hands. In 2012 he was much stronger at the catch point and was more reliable in that area. I had concerns that Williams could be stuck as a vertical target prior to the year, but he proved me differently in live action. During this week, however, those same thoughts started popping back into my head, especially seeing him fail to separate against safeties in man coverage.

4. Aaron Dobson (6025/203), Marshall - Dobson will have a great highlight reel, but there are plenty of questions. The opposing corners beat Dobson to the catch point with physical play multiple times this week, but in running routes against air the Marshall receiver showed burst out of his breaks with concise footwork.

5. Marquise Goodwin (5087/179), Texas - After watching him this week, the Longhorns really misused Goodwin. He was asked to run a lot of vertical routes, short screens, and jet sweeps or reverses in college. Despite that Goodwin was able to separate consistently against close coverage in a very natural way. He will struggle to get off the jam against press coverage, but Goodwin is very intriguing. Even if I have to use this week as the backbone of my evaluation (which I hate).

6. Cobi Hamilton (6016/191), Arkansas - Hamilton’s game is built on strong running after the catch. he isn’t afraid to take a big hit on contact, either, but he doesn’t quite run like an explosive receiver in his routes.

Tight Ends/Fullbacks

1. Vance McDonald (6041/262), Rice - At Rice, McDonald was used in a variety of ways that either muddled his evaluation or showed off versatility. Yes, he had a number of drops this week, but McDonald is a very intriguing player and it has become obvious why he’s a favorite of Phil Savage.

2. Michael Williams (6056/264), Alabama - Williams is the opposite of flashy, but he will play in the NFL for a long time because of his outstanding blocking for the position and large frame to shield defenders at the catch point. He will not get open unless he finds an open area or gets physical with a defensive back, but Williams is improving in that area.

3. Nick Kasa (6054/271), Colorado - Another great blocker for the position, Kasa seemed to fight the ball when trying to adjust for catches, but that is to be expected for the former defensive lineman. With overlooked long speed, Kasa is a likely fourth- or fifth-round pick.

4. Mychal Rivera (6032/237), Tennessee - Rivera built on his game each year at Tennessee, getting more and more comfortable working in the short to intermediate levels of defense and when hauling in catches.

5. Ryan Otten (6052/235), San Jose State - Otten checked in seven pounds lighter than expected due to the flu, but his game is very similar to Gary Barnidge’s. It is tough to know if that is a compliment, because Barnidge is tough to figure out, but Otten runs upright with reliable hands.

6. Kyle Juszczyk (6013/248), Harvard - I really liked what I saw from Juszczyk, who was making a conversion from a receiving role in the Ivy League to lead blocker. We know he can catch with comfort in the open field, but Juszczyk showed enough attitude and technique as a lead blocker to earn a draftable grade. He has deceptive long speed as well.

Offensive Linemen

1. Eric Fisher (6072/305), Central Michigan - There’s not much left to say about Fisher, but I believe he should be mentioned in the Luke Joeckel conversation as this class’ top offensive tackle. Fisher has quick hands and a strong extension to latch and ride or control his opposition immediately after the snap. His balance and base are also outstanding.

2. Lane Johnson (6062/302), Oklahoma - He looks like a tight end (and probably moves like one) but Johnson is a bonafide left tackle with a chance to play on the right side if necessary. He could add more weight, which would help with getting jolted on first contact leading to moments of waist bending, but Johnson’s athletic footwork to recover and mirror is awesome. He’s likely a top-20 pick.

3. Larry Warford (6032/333), Kentucky - There’s a lot of talk surrounding Chance Warmack, and rightfully so since he is likely the highest graded player in this draft. After that, UNC’s Jonathan Cooper gets a ton of love because of his agility when pulling and hitting targets at the second level. However, give me Warford because of his dominant, mauling style to consistently move or stone his opposition. And for his stout size, Warford is deceptively athletic.

4. Kyle Long (6061/304), Oregon - Long is inexperienced but along with his bloodlines comes a hard nosed attitude to push his opponents. The Duck is also athletic, so the only question is if his future is at guard or tackle.

5. Justin Pugh (6047/301), Syracuse - Pugh’s short arms may concern some, but if he gains a grip on his opponent on contact, the Syracuse product matches up very well with all types of rushers. He was occasionally driven into the backfield with force when facing length, but Pugh works best in close quarters and could move to guard.

6. Brian Winters (6034/310) - I love Winters’ nasty, rugged style. He blocks to punish, and although that gets Winters into trouble at times since he overextends, it will benefit him in the long run. He played tackle in college, but I expect Winters to play guard int he NFL.